What do the 'pugs think SHOULD have been done after Bengazi? Did they have ANY ideas?

Did they want us to bomb Libya back to the Stone Age? Reanimate Khadaffi? Restore EVERY deposed tyrant in the region?

And what difference do they think it would have made to declare the attacks terrorism any earlier than they were?

Do they honestly think this would have made a difference in the situation on the ground?

Or do they just think Mittens was entitled to get a boost in the polls from those deaths? And are they really that certain he WOULD have got that boost(couldn't a declaration of the killings being "a terrorist act" equally have led to a "rally 'round the flag" boost for Obama?)

Their sanctimony would be a little less nauseating if only they had actually proposed SOME other ideas about this at the time.

Any chance they'll just come out and actually SAY what it is they want here?

6. If you watch the video of Hillary Clinton on September 12, 2012,

What is unclear about that? Seems to me she was talking about terrorism.

What they didn't know then and haven't said they know now is who did it. And there were at the same time demonstrations against that movie -- in Cairo, for example.

Isn't the matter of who did what still being investigated?

What I want to know is why our ambassador and the Turkish ambassador met in Benghazi. Our Embassy is in Tripoli. Benghazi is way far from Tripoli and very near the Egyptian border. Why did they meet there? Was the Turkish ambassador somehow involved in the matter? Turkey is supposed to be our ally. But how did the attackers know that Stevens was in our consulate? Who told them? Or did they not know?

7. What they wanted?

They wanted to do as much damage as possible to the political careers of both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. It didn't work. Game over. Complete waste of time and tax dollars reminiscent of Kenneth Starr's crusade.